[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from Eldred oral argument
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] O'Connor quoted at USA Today from Eldred oral argument
- From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 20:49:03 -0400
- Organization: Real Measures
- References: <200210101924.g9AJONq02855@samsara.law.cwru.edu>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
"Peter D. Junger" wrote:
> I would suggest that Lessig's failure may be tactically wise---very wise.
Thanks for this explanation.
It helps me understand more, and it seems reasonable, though
I wonder if the "second best argument" really needed more
setup, and whether explicitly separating the two arguments
as he did, undermined the ploy as such.
Have to wait and see, I guess. And why is the First
Amendment argument regarded as secondary -- the lack of
DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders!
New Yorkers for Fair Use
I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication.
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but
only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual
practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no
claim of exclusive rights.